Everyone gets older. Unlike other groups that face social discrimination, ageism is distinct because it can cross the boundaries of race, class, gender and sexual orientation. 
However, it is perhaps because of this shared experience that "mature" adults can be ignored or overlooked as a legitimate minority that faces as much (or even more) prejudice by mainstream society.

"By the year 2021, Ontario will be home to three million people over the age of 65," said a 2001 report conducted by the Ontario Human Rights Commission (OHRC) entitled, "Time for Action: Advancing Human Rights for Older Ontarians". "There is an urgent need for action to eliminate ageism and age discrimination so that older persons can fully participate in our communities, enjoy the same rights afforded to others and can live their later years with dignity."

According to the report, the greatest barriers that mature persons face are "socially constructed", based upon unsubstantiated myths and misguided attitudes that had less to do with actual aging but rather "society's response to the process." 

The OHRC also had found numerous examples of systemic and institutionalized discrimination against mature citizens such as: Labelling "hearing loss or depression as a ‘normal' part of the aging process" that does not require "appropriate assessment and treatment"; timing traffic lights according to the average walking speed of a young and able-bodied person; and failing to focus health care spending upon "long-term, chronic care". Elder abuse and neglect, the need for affordable housing, elder care and mandatory retirement also received thorough examination.

Since the Commission's findings and recommendations were released four years ago, some progress is being made in at least one of these categories, namely, mandatory retirement. In the past, although the Ontario Human Rights Code granted the right to equal treatment with respect to age, the term "age" described in this provision only applied to "an age that is eighteen years or more and less than sixty-five years." This meant that those who were 65 years of age and older would not be protected from unjustifiable dismissal and would be unable to report any discriminatory action to the Commission. 

Last December, however, an amendment to the Code that would change the definition of age was introduced by then-Ontario Minister of Labour Christopher Bentley (currently Ontario Minister of Training, Colleges and Universities) as Bill 211, which received Royal Assent and will effectively ban mandatory retirement by the end of this year.
This is good news for advocacy groups such as Canada's Association for the Fifty-Plus, formerly known as the Canadian Association of Retired Persons (CARP), which extends its membership to those "who are 50 years or older, retired or not". Since it was founded 22 years ago, CARP - a name that the non-profit organization has chosen to keep - has over 400,000 members who "support [its] mandate to effectively promote the rights and quality of life of mature Canadians". 

Like many other advocacy groups that struggle for minority rights, although CARP has been anticipating signs of progress to emerge in legislations such as Bill 211 for quite some time, this is only one footstep at the start of a long journey to changing the societal misconceptions that are at the root of their marginalization.

Continuing to uphold negative stereotypes of mature persons by accepting and perpetuating popular portrayals that denigrate their personhood as senile, helpless or child-like is just as damaging and ignorant as supporting sexist and racist slurs.

Our bodies may change over time, but that should never affect our intrinsic dignity and worth as human beings.